Taking words or lines out of context

Taking the shabad line out of context or picking the words to say inappropriate, fools will soon start condemning Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji if we as a panth don’t take stand against those condemning our Nitnem. These are mostly the same people mostly condemning Naam. When we are hollow without Naam, we may get all kind of weird ideas.

Below are few great lines with tough words teaching important lessons from Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji.

ਜੇ ਲਖ ਇਸਤਰੀਆ ਭੋਗ ਕਰਹਿ ਨਵ ਖੰਡ ਰਾਜੁ ਕਮਾਹਿ ॥ - Clear enough if we just take one line or few words even though next line would clarify that without Naam, you won’t get peace.

ਓਹੁ ਘਰਿ ਘਰਿ ਹੰਢੈ ਜਿਉ ਰੰਨ ਦੋੁਹਾਗਣਿ ਓਸੁ ਨਾਲਿ ਮੁਹੁ ਜੋੜੇ ਓਸੁ ਭੀ ਲਛਣੁ ਲਾਇਆ ॥ - Now ਘਰਿ ਘਰਿ ਹੰਢੈ is an inappropriate word to be used but Guru Sahib want to give example of how low a person who don’t follow one path could be.

ਗੋਤਮ ਨਾਰਿ ਉਮਾਪਤਿ ਸ੍ਵਾਮੀ ॥ ਸੀਸੁ ਧਰਨਿ ਸਹਸ ਭਗ ਗਾਂਮੀ ॥੪॥ - ਭਗ is clearly an inappropriate word and no one talk about it in a family but using words in telling the common stories to explain the important teaching is very common.

So let's educate ourself with teaching of Guru Sahib and not of people and don’t make issue out of everything. Let’s use that energy for Naam Japna and Guru Sahib will bless us with Gurmat.

Very well said Harmeet Singh jeeo.

If one Pankiti is taken in isolation and the stanza and the Shabad is ignored, then it can be taken out of context. People who are opposing Dasam Bani today, will certainly oppose Bhagat Bani and Bhatt Bani of Siri Guru Granth Sahib jee and as a matter of fact some of these Naastik people have already started opposing these Baanis saying that only the Baani of Guru Sahibaan is Sachi Baani. Slowly they are moving towards opposing Siri Guru Granth Sahib jee.

Basically, they want Gurbani to fall in line with their pre-set beliefs and where Gurbani does not fall in line with their beliefs, they either misinterpret such Baani to fit their beliefs or start opposing it. Pathetic!

We need to be vigilant and above all we all need to be well versed in understanding Bani; only then we can repulse attacks on Gurmat.

Kulbir Singh

Going off of Kulbir Singh's comment, one of the first people in recent history that started speaking against Dasam Granth, Babu Teja Singh (who, before his excommunication, was a friend of Bhai Randhir Singh), had spoke out against Bhagat Bani and Bhatt Bani as well. He thought only Bani written by the Gurus should be included in Sri Guru Granth Sahib.

He had prepared a Saroop of Sri Guru Granth Sahib without Bhagat Bani, Bhatt Bani, etc. He even left out Raagmala (but that is a pretty touchy subject on this site, so lets just leave it at that). After all this Bani was taken out, he still felt it was incomplete, since it didn't have Bani of all ten Gurus. This is why he included a 21 Pauri Basant Ki Vaar which had Saloks of Mahalla 6, 7, and 8, including WaheguruNaamJahaajHaiCharheSoUtraiPaar. He claimed that this was the complete version of Basant Ki Vaar, since it included Saloks and was longer than just the 3 Pauris that are already in Sri Guru Granth Sahib. This Vaar (other than the 3 Pauris written by Sri Guru Arjan Dev Ji) was likely written by either Babu Teja Singh himself or Darbari Das, son of Meharbaan in his Harjas Pothi (but either way, it's Kachi Bani).

Anyways, the point is that this guy went through so much trouble just to compile a Saroop of Sri Guru Granth Sahib that included Bani of just the 10 Gurus and no more. I wouldn't be surprised if some of these people against Dasam Bani today will try to do something like this again in the future. If I recall correctly Darshan Singh had made some comments against Bhagat Naamdev's Bani around the same time he started speaking against Dasam Bani.

This whole issue of people being against Dasam Bani is fairly recent anyways; before like 5 years ago, no one had a problem with it. And back when Bhai Randhir Singh/Sant Gurbachan Singh's time, people like Babu Teja Singh, who spoke against Dasam Bani, were being excommunicated for it (but of course efforts were being made to turn people away from Dasam Bani; for example, the whole Rehras shortening issue). Similarly, during Sant Jarnail Singh's time, no one spoke against it.

Most of those against Dasam Bani haven't read it for themselves. When I first learned about Dasam Bani, I went in being told that it wasn't all Gurbani and I had that mindset while I was researching it. But while reading it for myself I came to the conclusion that it is all Gurbani. Also, not to sound arrogant, but I would say that after reading it for myself, I have been able to refute any point someone has made against it when discussing it with me (but of course, most of them don't really listen to what you say anyways, so it doesn't convince them).

Quote

He had prepared a Saroop of Sri Guru Granth Sahib without Bhagat Bani, Bhatt Bani, etc. He even left out Raagmala (but that is a pretty touchy subject on this site, so lets just leave it at that). After all this Bani was taken out, he still felt it was incomplete, since it didn't have Bani of all ten Gurus. This is why he included a 21 Pauri Basant Ki Vaar which had Saloks of Mahalla 6, 7, and 8, including WaheguruNaamJahaajHaiCharheSoUtraiPaar. He claimed that this was the complete version of Basant Ki Vaar, since it included Saloks and was longer than just the 3 Pauris that are already in Sri Guru Granth Sahib. This Vaar (other than the 3 Pauris written by Sri Guru Arjan Dev Ji) was likely written by either Babu Teja Singh himself or Darbari Das, son of Meharbaan in his Harjas Pothi (but either way, it's Kachi Bani).

Could you please provide reference to the above statements e.g. that Babu Teja Singh added Saloks of Mahalla 6, 7 and 8 or that he changed Basant ki Vaar? There have been a lot of false allegations on Babu Teja Singh and a lot of rumours were rife in those days but his actual wrongdoings were none of the above. What he had done was print Sanchees for school study, that did not include Bhatt Baani. I am not aware of a Saroop that they printed without Bhatt Baani or Bhagat Baani. Maybe they had such plans but nothing manifested to that extent. Maybe they had an hidden agenda but there was no Gurmata against Bhagat Baani in Panch Khalsa. Please refer to the history of Panch Khalsa as written by Giani Lal Singh Sangrur.

The other main allegations on him were, firstly, they changed Gurmantr to Vahugur, secondly they changed Ardaas by replacing Bhagauti with Satnaam and thirdly they did not put pataasay in Khanday Pahul. God knows why they started these controversies and brought about a huge damage on the future of Khalsa Panth.

It was their misfortune and Panth's misfortune that such a great movement got hijacked by parochial minded people. When Panth Khalsa started it had blessings of Mahapurakhs like Sant Attar Singh jee Mastaunaewale and Gurmukhs like Bhai Sahib Randhir Singh jee and Bhai Kahn Singh Nabha were associated with them. They accomplished great achievements but later on, after Bhai Sahib went to jail with his whole Jatha, Panch Khalsa got hijacked. They were led astray.

Kulbir Singh

Quote
Kulbir Singh
Could you please provide reference to the above statements e.g. that Babu Teja Singh added Saloks of Mahalla 6, 7 and 8 or that he changed Basant ki Vaar?

I don't really know much about Babu Teja Singh but I heard this too in Sant Gurbachan Singh Ji Khalsa Bhindranwale's Basant Ki Vaar katha.

Well, though I went on bit of a tangent about Babu Teja Singh, that's not exactly the main topic of the thread, so I first would like to apologize to Harmeet Singh for changing the topic.

If you listen to Sant Gurbachan Singh's Katha of BasantKiVaar, you can hear him mention the 21 Pauri one that Babu Teja Singh tried to push forward. The first half of the Katha is of the actual Bani, so if you are only interested in hearing about the other part, you can skip forward about 15 minutes or so.

Sant Ji mentions that someone showed him the 21 Pauri Basant Ki Vaar at one point, and urged him to take it and do Parchaar about it. But of course, he knew better and didn't do anything like that.

It's been a while since I've heard the Katha, so I'm not sure exactly about whether the Saroop of Sri Guru Granth Sahib with the ommitted Bani was just an idea or if it ended up actually happening, but you can hear about it in the Katha.

I would link to it, but I am currently on my phone, so it is a bit difficult. It shouldn't be too hard to find online.

Each shabad is scientifically written by guru ji.
each shabad is like theorem in geometry.
To prove : rhau
proof : all lines before and after rhau.
single line of shabad has no meaning . it is supporting lines to prove some thing

Quote

If you listen to Sant Gurbachan Singh's Katha of BasantKiVaar, you can hear him mention the 21 Pauri one that Babu Teja Singh tried to push forward. The first half of the Katha is of the actual Bani, so if you are only interested in hearing about the other part, you can skip forward about 15 minutes or so.

As I mentioned in my previous post, a lot of rumours were rife about Babu Teja Singh in those days and since the information traveled slow in that era, a lot got changed as the information traveled from one person to next. Babu Teja Singh made some big mistakes and very unnecessary mistakes but creating new Baani of Mahalla 6, 7 or 8 and adding to Basant kee Vaar are offences that he did not commit. Proof would be if there is something published by Panch Khalsa Diwan. Otherwise, it's all rumours.

It's all Will of Vaheguru jee that Panch Khalsa did not get credit for it's services to Panth, because they committed grave mistakes in their later years but I have no hesitation in saying that Sikh Panth may have been swallowed by Hindu religion, if Panch Khalsa had not existed in that era of darkness.

In any case, today there is a much more dangerous group of atheists who are hell bent on altering Gurmat, and we need to focus on them. What's bygone is bygone.

Kulbir Singh

Well, I'm not saying that he wrote it himself. I would say that it is more likely that Darbari Das had written i. But anyways, it doesn't matter too much anyways, because it's not like there are people advocating the longer Vaar or anything, so it isn't too big of an issue.

When it comes to your comment about how without the Panch Khalsa Diwan, the Sikh Panth would have been swallowed by the Hindu religion, I would respectfully disagree. But again, since that isn't the main focus of the thread, I will request we not go too much further into this.

It is unfortunate that some Taksal Singhs always put down Bhai Sahib by associating him with Panch Khalsa divan but ignore the fact that Shiromani Sant, Sant Attar Singh Mastuanevale and Shiromani vidhvaans like Bhai Kahn Singh Nabha and Pandit Kartar Singh Dakha were also part of this organization. If Bhai Sahib did not believe in Ragmala, but why do you ignore the fact that Sant Attar Singh Mastuane wale and Bhai Kahn Singh Nabha and countless others also did not believe in Ragmala as Gur Rachna. Then why only single out Bhai Sahib unless it is due to some malicious intent.

Quote
nimana
It is unfortunate that some Taksal Singhs always put down Bhai Sahib by associating him with Panch Khalsa divan but ignore the fact that Shiromani Sant, Sant Attar Singh Mastuanevale and Shiromani vidhvaans like Bhai Kahn Singh Nabha and Pandit Kartar Singh Dakha were also part of this organization. If Bhai Sahib did not believe in Ragmala, but why do you ignore the fact that Sant Attar Singh Mastuane wale and Bhai Kahn Singh Nabha and countless others also did not believe in Ragmala as Gur Rachna. Then why only single out Bhai Sahib unless it is due to some malicious intent.

This is a topic that the Khalsa Panth has agreed to not cause any conflict over. Many Singhs have become Shaheed, some believed in Ragmala while others didn't but all of them believed in Dasam Bani, Bhagat Bani, and Bhatt Bani. Many of these Shaheed Singhs worked together towards a common goal, regardless of beliefs. This is what we should strive towards today rather than beating the same dead horse over and over again.

Bhul chuk maafi

DarbarDaKookar Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> > It is unfortunate that some Taksal Singhs always
> put down Bhai Sahib by associating him with Panch
> Khalsa divan but ignore the fact that Shiromani
> Sant, Sant Attar Singh Mastuanevale and Shiromani
> vidhvaans like Bhai Kahn Singh Nabha and Pandit
> Kartar Singh Dakha were also part of this
> organization. If Bhai Sahib did not believe in
> Ragmala, but why do you ignore the fact that Sant
> Attar Singh Mastuane wale and Bhai Kahn Singh
> Nabha and countless others also did not believe in
> Ragmala as Gur Rachna. Then why only single out
> Bhai Sahib unless it is due to some malicious
> intent.
>
>
> This is a topic that the Khalsa Panth has agreed
> to not cause any conflict over. Many Singhs have
> become Shaheed, some believed in Ragmala while
> others didn't but all of them believed in Dasam
> Bani, Bhagat Bani, and Bhatt Bani. Many of these
> Shaheed Singhs worked together towards a common
> goal, regardless of beliefs. This is what we
> should strive towards today rather than beating
> the same dead horse over and over again.
>
> Bhul chuk maafi

100% spot on, no one has or will sort this out on the hundreds and thousands of man hours dedicated to Ragmala soon after the internet became widespread. Think Kulbir Singh once pointed out, the difference in Maryada is like 1% for the main Jathe - surely we can stand together and move forward on the 99% we 'do' agree on.

gurs1kh Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> This is why he included a 21 Pauri Basant Ki Vaar


I just want to make a quick correction to my post from earlier. The Basant Ki Vaar that was being referenced was a 15 Pauri one, not 21 Pauris. Not too big of a deal, but I just thought I'd mention it.